When people hear the phrase “left-wing political machine,” they probably think of local activist groups, paid protestors, and maybe even out-of-state wealthy progressive donors writing checks from afar. That mental model would be both outdated, oversimplified, and a major underestimation.
What operates in Arizona today is far more sophisticated and opaque. It’s best understood not as a movement (as the Left likes to brand themselves), but as a syndicate: multiple non-profits leveraging tax-deductible contributions to advance shared political goals through a permanent, year-round infrastructure.
Our newly released report, prepared in conjunction with the Arizona Liberty Network, examined the financial transactions between a consortium of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) operating in the Grand Canyon State, and illuminates just how far-reaching this system is…in Arizona, this liberal syndicate has its fingerprints on almost every lever of government.
A National Pipeline, Not a Local Movement
When examining the financing of the liberal syndicate, it’s important to note that virtually all of their funding comes from out of state sources. National, and in some cases multinational, donors and foundations are the primary sources of money. The NGO network also utilizes direct taxpayer subsidies through grants at the federal level.
Most of the individual donors and foundations bankrolling the syndicate provide their giving through a financial instrument known as a donor-advised fund (DAFs). A DAF lets wealthy progressives make tax-deductible contributions to a private fund, which then routs their donations to ideological nonprofits.
The other major trough of funding for the network comes from taxpayers in the form of government grants. The most notable federal agency providing these funds was USAID, which contributed over $50 million last cycle to progressive “philanthropic” organizations that then participate in political advocacy in Arizona.
From there, the money gets funneled through a web of intermediary organizations. Arabella Advisors (recently defunct and being replaced by Sunflower Services), Tides, and their affiliated funds dominate this space. These groups aggregate all that tax-advantaged and taxpayer-backed dollars, then redeploy them nationwide. Arizona is one of their preferred destinations.
Our report tracked more than 180 financial transactions, primarily from 2023 and 2024 alone. Altogether, the upstream sources pushed over $1.8 billion into the liberal NGO network, with nearly $200M ending up with organizations operating in Arizona.
So, this is no organic grassroots “movement.” It is a sophisticated syndicate: part tax-subsidized, part tax-advantaged, and built to operate year-round…
Wealthy leftists outside the state are paying big money to deepen the blue in Arizona.
An investigative report by the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC) and AZ Liberty Network (AZLN) documented the way national organizations are funding to strengthen Democratic politics in Arizona: Donor Advised Funds, dark-money intermediaries, and teachers’ unions.
AFEC and AZLN found the flow of funds totaled over $1 billion, at least.
Per the report, these tax-advantaged funds don’t arrive in Arizona directly. The millions change hands between different organizations before coming into the state, sometimes multiple times, effectively turning the money dark.
“Money enters the system tax-free, travels invisibly, and reemerges as ‘local’ influence with national fingerprints erased,” reads the report. “The result is a tax-advantaged, publicly underwritten, and union-fueled political machine that dwarfs traditional party structures, and it has reshaped Arizona’s civic landscape. It is not organic, spontaneous, or homegrown—it is manufactured, calculated, and imported, creating an institutionalized system of progressive infrastructure.”
The money flow begins with what the report calls “Upstream Sources.” Two cost-saving vehicles make the funding flows a reality: tax-advantaged Donor Advised Funds (DAFs) and direct taxpayer subsidization available through federal grantmaking. The former includes funds like Fidelity Charitable, Silicon Valley Community Foundation, and Rockefeller Advisors. The latter vehicle largely operates through USAID. This agency gave the Tides Center $25 million to combat “misinformation.”
In 2024, the report found the Upstream Sources spent over $33 million in Arizona in non-federal races — a key year for determining which party would control the state legislature.
Altogether, Upstream Sources sent over $1 billion to organizations that acted as intermediaries — “Intermediary Organizations” — such as Sunflower Services (until recently, Arabella Advisors), Tides Nexus, and networks backed by billionaires George Soros or Hansjörg Wyss. Soros and Wyss also act as Upstream Sources.
From there, these funds finally make their way into Arizona. Top recipients that received millions include One Arizona, LUCHA, ACE, Chispa, Arizona Mirror, and the Copper Courier: the “Arizona Groups,” per the report.
The report alleged that the last two nonprofits listed, Arizona Mirror and Copper Courier, are news sites run by “Democratic operatives.”
Arizona Groups spent over $7 million to support down-ticket legislative Democrats, and nearly $5 million against the Republicans.
Further on the report mapped out how teachers’ unions fund local political action committees to influence Arizona races.
“These taxpayer-funded transfers, ostensibly for professional development or services, ultimately help free funds to support the same partisan infrastructure advancing the Left’s political objectives across Arizona,” stated the report.
Additionally, the report noted that the Arizona Education Association shares its headquarters building with other progressive organizations, such as One Arizona.
AFEC’s press release on the report interpreted the flow of funds as national influencing of local issues.
“This isn’t activism, it’s a professional, tax-advantaged political operation designed to look local but controlled from afar,” stated AFEC. “Arizona isn’t changing — it’s being engineered. Conservatives need a clear roadmap, strong counter-infrastructure, and strategic engagement to protect the state’s future and preserve local control.”
AFEC President Scot Mussi told “Winn Tucson” that the report was inspired by the USAID scandal around the time of President Donald Trump’s inauguration. That prompted curiosity about the origins of funding for Arizona’s major progressive political organizations.
Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, joins Kathleen Winn on WINN TUCSON KVOI 1030 to discuss the Club’s newly released “Arizona’s Liberal NGO Syndicate Report.” Mussi breaks down how a coordinated network of national nonprofits and political intermediaries… pic.twitter.com/9QjDCpQUD5
In a since-deleted article, “Three Women-Led Organizations That Helped Flip Arizona Blue,” principal actors behind several of the most powerful leftist dark money organizations in the state bragged about engineering Democratic voter turnout in the 2020 election.
Vianey Olivarria, then-communications director and current executive director for Chispa AZ, credited work done by her organization and others to turn out Democratic voters. Olivarria also served as a director of Activate 48, a coalition of Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) organizations.
“Arizona turning blue is a victory a decade in the making and owed to the tireless work and dedication of Black, Brown, and Indigenous people who organize for justice and liberation,” stated Olivarria.
Chispa AZ is a 501(c)(4) project of the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), another 501(c)(4), and sponsored by Way to Win, a national donor network aimed at defeating Republican candidates. Way to Win served as the sponsor to Progress Arizona, formerly and once again led by Gov. Katie Hobbs’ ousted spokeswoman Josselyn Berry.
Per the IRS, a 501(c)(4) organization may engage in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to candidates so long as those activities aren’t the organization’s primary activity.
Discrepancies exist in various organizations’ tax returns disclosing contributions to Chispa AZ’s political arm, Chispa AZ PAC. Neither “Chispa AZ” or “Chispa AZ PAC” exist within the IRS database. Also, Chispa AZ has claimed the same EIN as LCV publicly; however, different organizations’ tax returns have cited multiple, nonexistent EINs for Chispa AZ.
In their 2018,2019, and 2020 tax returns, LCV listed an EIN number for Chispa AZ PAC that yielded no results in the IRS Tax Exempt Organization database. In their 2019 tax return, LCV listed an organization called Fuerte Arts Movement for the Chispa AZ PAC’s address, and listed the same EIN number from 2018. They used the EIN again in their tax return.
In the 2019, 2020, and 2021 tax returns from the California-based Grove Action Fund, a different address and EIN number from that used by LCV were listed for Chispa AZ PAC. The listed address was the correct address for Chispa AZ; however, the EIN listed also doesn’t exist in the IRS database.
Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona’s 2020 tax return listed that same nonexistent EIN number as well, and offered the Fuerte Arts Movement address.
Tax returns from the Green Advocacy Project (2020) and the Wilderness Society Action Fund (2019) also listed the nonexistent EIN given by LCV, but listed the correct address.
Publicly collected data reflects that Chispa AZ PAC has managed at least around $8.5 million in contributions since 2017. Yet, Chispa AZ has claimed to have total revenues of nearly $26.9 million, net assets of over $18.4 million, and expenses of over $18.9 million.
Chispa AZ is also part of MiAZ, a coalition of nonprofits focused on turning out minority voters.
Other Chispa organizations exist in Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Nevada, and Texas.
Chispa AZ isn’t the only dark money entity lacking a clear IRS status to have an outsized impact for Democrats in recent elections. There’s also the two Arizona Asian American Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (AZ AANHPI) related organizations: AZ AANHPI for Equity and AZ AANHPI Advocates. Although AZ AANHPI wasn’t featured in the deleted 2020 article, their communications director was: Alexa Rio-Osaki. She spoke on behalf of a different dark money nonprofit also part of MiAZ: Our Voice, Our Vote.
“We’re doing what we can to ensure everyone’s represented,” said Rio-Osaki.
Rio-Osaki has her hands in multiple leftist dark money organizations: in addition to AZ AANHPI and Our Voice, Our Vote, Rio-Osaki served as the director of Progress Arizona.
Recently, AZ AANHPI for Equity has engaged in lawfare against non-party conservative organizations, demanding transparency of private documents while operating in the dark itself.
AANHPI for Equity and AZ AANHPI Advocates have independent websites, social media pages, and staff, yet the pair are presented as one entity in multiple locations (for example, on the AZ AANHPI for Equity “about us” page). Both were founded in July 2020 by Jennifer Chau, who has served as the director for AZ AANHPI for Equity, an unspecified nonprofit, and executive director for AZ AANHPI Advocates, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, since their inception according to her LinkedIn page.
According to the IRS, AZ AANHPI Advocates had its federal tax exempt status automatically revoked in mid-May for not filing any tax forms in the entire three years of its existence (EIN:85-2344934). The IRS issued its revocation posting earlier this month. No IRS records exist for AZ AANHPI for Equity.
Yet, both organizations’ websites continue to solicit donations and market themselves as nonprofits. The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) awarded AZ AANHPI Advocates good standing for its status as a nonprofit in mid-July as well. No ACC records exist for AZ AANHPI for Equity.
Like Chispa AZ, AZ AANHPI has used EIN numbers of another organization in receipt of funds. In 2021, AZ AANHPI for Equity received $25,000 from Solidago Foundation and gave the EIN belonging to One Arizona, the 30-nonprofit coalition to which all five Arabella Advisors nonprofit arms issued funds. Also that year, AZ AANHPI made its name synonymous with “One Arizona” and used its EIN in its receipt of $35,000 in funding from Asian Americans Advancing Justice.
On its website, AZ AANHPI Advocates discloses that it receives funding from top leftist dark money organizations The Future We Need and Arizona Wins!. The listed address for The Future We Need is the same address for the Arizona Education Association and Progress Now Arizona (now Progress Arizona); yet, no such organization as “The Future We Need” exists per ACC, the IRS, the Federal Election Commission (FEC), or the secretary of state’s campaign finance databases. There does exist a similarly-named dark left political action committee (PAC) entity, “The Future We Want.”
In their entire three years of advocacy and fundraising, only AZ AANHPI Advocates had any campaign finance records filed within the state: just one receipt of $10,000 from Invest in Arizona in August 2021, for “signature gathering.” According to the secretary of state’s campaign finance database, AZ AANHPI has never filed any reports on their contributions or expenditures.
The deleted article was published by Supermajority News: a project of Supermajority and the Supermajority Education Fund, the latter a project of the Arabella Advisors’ New Venture Fund. Arabella Advisors is behind one of the biggest dark money funding networks in the nation; their shadowy dealings prompted the District of Columbia attorney general to issue subpoenas to the organization last month.
Along with their Arizona-based compatriots, Supermajority will also be working to turn out more Democratic voters in the upcoming 2024 election.
Last year, Supermajority reported turning out over 959,000 voters: nearly 116,200 in Arizona. The organization had over 8,000 active members in Arizona. Supermajority reported that they ensured the turnout of 30 percent of women ages 18 to 35 years old, specifically to ensure the re-election of Sen. Mark Kelly and election of Gov. Katie Hobbs. The organization disclosed that their approach consisted of contacting female Democrat voters that sporadically voted in presidential elections but hadn’t voted in midterm elections.
“At the state level, we were able to help elect and support progressive governors who would protect and expand women’s freedoms in their states,” stated Supermajority.
Supermajority took credit for Kelly’s re-election and Hobbs’ election, declaring that 92 percent of Kelly’s margin of victory was made up of their voters and that their 116,200-voter turnout far surpassed Hobbs’ 17,100-vote margin.
The organization also noted its plans for the upcoming 2024 election: contacting 432,300 female Arizona voters who didn’t vote last year, overcoming the projected 10,500-vote victory margin, and electing a Democratic senator to take independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema’s seat. The organization also plans to target Georgia and North Carolina.
“We need a Democratic senator in AZ who will work alongside Sen. Mark Kelley [sic],” stated Supermajority.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The District of Columbia attorney general is investigating Arabella Advisors, the dark money giant operating a national funding network for leftist nonprofits, including in Arizona.
The Washington Free Beacon discovered that the DC attorney general issued subpoenas last month to Arabella Advisors, as well as its largest clients, concerning investigative reporting about tax law aversion and illegal profiteering.
Arabella Advisors manages five nonprofits that funnel dark money funds into other leftist nonprofits and initiatives: New Venture Fund, Sixteen Thirty Fund, Hopewell Fund, Windward Fund, and the North Fund. Their influence is expansive, both nationally and in Arizona.
The five nonprofits all funded One Arizona, a coalition of leftist nonprofits, who in turn funded Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA), Chispa AZ, Arizona Advocacy Network, ProgressNow AZ, and Mi Familia Vota. Those nonprofits used that funding to advance their causes in Arizona’s elections.
An outgrowth of the New Venture Fund’s front initiative, We Mean Business Coalition, collaborated with the Carbon Disclosure Project and World Resources Institute to create the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi). Last November, the Biden administration proposed granting decision-making power on defense contracts to SBTi. In February a key initiative of SBTi, the Advanced and Indirect Mitigation (AIM) Platform, launched at GreenBiz 23 in Scottsdale.
Another New Venture Fund initiative, Campus Vote Project, has a presence across 41 states. In Arizona, the initiative coordinates with Arizona State University, Mesa Community College, South Mountain Community College, Northern Arizona University, Eastern Arizona College, Cochise College, Chandler-Gilbert Community College, and Phoenix College to increase voter turnout among college students.
Prior to the 2020 election, only Mesa Community College and South Mountain Community College were recognized by the dark money-originating initiative.
Also concerning higher education, the New Venture Fund created a scholarship program fund that partnered with Northern Arizona University (NAU) last year to pay illegal immigrant students’ tuition.
The Sixteen Thirty Fund was a major funder to the nonprofit Way to Win, which spent $110 million in key states, including in Arizona, to ensure Democratic victories in 2020. Way to Win served as the sponsor to Progress Arizona (formerly ProgressNow Arizona), who was led by Gov. Katie Hobbs’ ousted spokeswoman, Josselyn Berry, until at least 2021.
Those listed as running Progress Arizona, according to their latest available tax return (2021), were:
Emily Kirkland (executive director): Arizona Education Association communications director; former senior political strategist for the Colibri Collective; former director of Organizing for 350 Massachusetts and communications coordinator for Better Future Project
Ariel Reyes (director): Instituto political director; former Arizona Wins political director; former lobbyist for the Torres Consulting and Law Group
Elsa O’Callaghan (director): consultant with Prickly Pear Consulting; executive director of Arizona Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee; former staffer for California Rep. Karen Bass (D); and former Planned Parenthood Los Angeles staffer
Belen Sisa (director): unemployed DACA recipient; former Democracy Initiative campaign manager; former communications staffer for Democratic congressional candidates Victor Reyes (New Mexico) and Mike Siegal (Texas), independent presidential candidate Bernie Sanders; and former staffer for Arizona Wins and Mi Familia Vota
Alexa-Rio Osaki (director): director of Arizona Asian American Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (AZ AANHPI) Advocates; Arizona Coalition for Change communications director
Josselyn Berry (chairman)
The Hopewell Fund and Sixteen Thirty Fund have issued much of the funding for Opportunity Arizona. Until 2021, one of the individuals behind that organization was Dacey Montoya: a principal player in many of the dark money groups, Democratic candidates, and progressive initiatives in Arizona.
Those listed running the organization, according to their latest available tax return, were:
Ben Scheel (executive director): director of Bright Phoenix; former deputy campaign manager for Phoenix city council candidate Karlene Parks
Ed Hermes (board president): attorney; Osborn Elementary School District governing board president; vice chair of the city of Phoenix’s Vision Zero Committee; Maricopa County Superior Court judge pro tempore; and Move Osborne Forward treasurer
Josh Zaragoza (board member): political consultant involved in Phoenix City Councilwoman Yassamin Ansari’s council campaign and ongoing congressional campaign; former chief of staff to Phoenix Councilwoman Laura Pastor; and former Human Rights Campaign organizer
Monica Pimentel (board member): Arizona Latino School Board Association president; Glendale Elementary School District governing board member; Maricopa County Deferred Compensation Committee member; and former Movimiento Estudiantil Chicanx de Aztlan (MEChA) vice president
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Benjamin Franklin once famously said, “[I]n this world, nothing is certain except death and taxes” — true, unless you’re a leftist political nonprofit. For many of them, taxation isn’t certain, even if they run afoul of tax-exempt status requirements.
Funding sources, expenditure recipients, and even those operating these nonprofits may remain secretive under the current state of lax federal enforcement. These tax-free and opacity perks are possible through two interrelated federal tax classifications: 501(c)(3), or “C3,” and 501(c)(4), or “C4.” There are over 27,000 C3s and just over 1,200C4s registered in Arizona. The big difference between the two classifications is that donations to IRS-recognized C3 organizations are deductible under our income tax code. And the Left has learned how to exploit this tax status for their political benefit.
In Arizona, many liberal C3 and C4 nonprofits work in tandem, each executing symbiotic duties while coordinating their activities and sharing data and resources. Sometimes, these C3 and C4 duos are “sister” organizations — meaning, they’re affiliated rather than independent entities allied over common goals.
These arrangements are legal so long as clear distinctions are made between charitable and non-charitable activities. Over the last several months, AZ Free News has conducted an extensive review of over a dozen different liberal nonprofits in the state, examining their websites, tax documents, and social media accounts. Our research has found that many of these organizations have blurred the lines on their political activities via various C3 and C4 groups. In some cases, there appeared to be no distinction at all, with some C3 organizations providing completely different accounts of their tax-deductible program activities to the IRS compared to what they shared publicly.
How the IRS Intended for C3 and C4 Organizations to Operate
C3s have two major qualifiers: they’re supposed to be nonpartisan and apolitical—meaning, they can’t expend funds or use resources to coordinate with political activity being conducted by C4s.
C3s must organize and operate exclusively for purposes that are one or more of the following: charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals.
The IRS defines “charitable” as relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.
The IRS expressly prohibits C3s from being an “action organization”: those engaging in political or legislative activities. Political activities include the direct or indirect participation or intervention in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any political candidate. The IRS also prohibits political campaign fund contributions or public statements of positions, either verbal or written, on behalf of the organization in favor of or opposing any candidate.
The IRS does condone voter education activities, such as get-out-the-vote (GOTV) efforts like voter registration. However, any evidence of political bias is forbidden: favoritism of a candidate, opposing a candidate in any way, or “hav[ing] the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates.” Lobbying is also largely forbidden.
Comparatively, the IRS classifies C4 organizations into one of two categories: social welfare organizations or local association of employees. The former concerns civic leagues or organizations organized exclusively for social welfare promotion, not profit. The IRS clarifies that social welfare promotion doesn’t include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate. Those that do must not render that activity as their primary activity, and risk being subjected to taxation. The latter concerns membership-based organizations with net earnings devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.
How Leftist C3 and C4s Operate in Arizona
Our review of leftist C3s in Arizona appears to indicate that their activities are overtly partisan and political. They coordinate with politically active C4s to achieve shared, partisan goals, and receive political action committee (PAC) funding while doing so. Often, these leftist C4s have either direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to one or more candidates.
Progressive activists leading these C3s have effectively mastered the art of exploiting the IRS code for partisan advantage, helping to maximize liberal donor partisan impact with their dollars while still hiding their identity. The C3s will claim that their allowable vote (GOTV) efforts, such as voter registration, are nonpartisan. They will claim they’re reaching out to certain, “marginalized” demographic groups; however, these groups turn out to be known Democratic voter bases.
One example of this is Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, the C3 sister organization of Mi Familia Vota, the C4. The former admitted on their 2020 tax filing to coordinating political activity with the latter. The executive director of Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, Hector Sanchez Barba, has publicly advocated for the losses of Republican candidates.
“We will keep working to keep extremism, Trump and MAGA out of our democracy,” wrote Sanchez Barba. “@MiFamiliaVota.”
In response to a Politico article documenting the GOP’s underperformance in last year’s midterm elections, Sanchez Barba thanked Latino voters for having Democrats win.
Meanwhile, their partner C4s pay for media and partisan activities like ad campaigns for candidates. It’s uncertain whether the funding for these activities comes from their C3 partners since those grant or cost-sharing agreements aren’t public. The IRS requires that C3 funds given to C4s be restricted to charitable uses — not electioneering activity.
The C3-C4 duo targets certain voter demographics to achieve a partisan outcome. They contact Democrat-leaning voters to get their vote cast, convince newly registered voters to vote Democratic through mailers and ads supportive of Democratic candidates and causes, and publicly support certain partisan ballot initiatives.
The C3-C4 sister organizations thinly veil their efforts that a division exists between them. For example, Mi Familia Vota spent tens of thousands on TV advertising that advocated for the election of Reginald Bolding ahead of last year’s primary. However, they listed a staffer for their C3 sister organization, Mi Familia Vota Education, as the point-of-contact on that campaign filing.
As AZ Free News reported in Part One of this series, Mi Familia Vota receives funding from One Arizona, a C3, which in turn receives its funding from the Tides Foundation, George Soros’ Open Societies Foundation, and several different organizations under Arabella Advisors.
.@RealMarkFinchem, a MAGAmigo, lies, & says that the 2020 election was fraudulent. If elected, he would use his position to help Trump. We are fighting for free and clear elections this cycle. Our democracy is at stake in Arizona, we must fight back. We say #BastaFinchempic.twitter.com/WPVSjflt2L
Ahead of the midterm election last June, One Arizona advertised a job opening for an independent expenditure (IE) campaign manager. The position appears to be one for a political staffer, which would constitute prohibited electioneering.
While not a complete pitcure, the above graphic illustrates some of the connections in the left’s secretive infrastructure and how they relate to Arizona elections.
Leftist C3s also hire for both the C3 and C4, resulting in shared jobs and salaries. One Arizona (C3) and Arizona Wins (C4) co-hired staff including a field director, field program coordinator, and finance and compliance director. That shared salary should not be used for political work. One recent example of this was a job listing by Arizona Coalition for Change (C3) and Our Voice Our Vote (C4) for a data manager that would work within the duo’s political and grassroots lobbying arms.
These blurred lines surrounding co-hires don’t just apply to staff. Arizona Center for Empowerment (ACE, a C3) and LUCHA (C4) share an executive director, Alejandra (Alex) Gomez, as well as staffers. This relationship is further complicated by the fact that ACE listed LUCHA as its “Employer of Record” on their latest tax return. Under Gomez, both organizations have expressed their partisanship.
Last year, LUCHA launched an initiative to get Democratic candidates elected: “LUCHA Blue.” The nonprofit pledged to prioritize certain races and voter bases in its GOTV efforts. On its hiring page for the initiative, LUCHA disclosed that it would staff between 70 and 105 people.
“We believe that not all candidates align with the mission of LUCHA, and this is why we created a campaign not only to flip Arizona Blue — but LUCHA Blue!” stated LUCHA. “Overall, the goal of the campaign is to win these targeted races, increase Latin/Hispanic voter turnout, and educate voters on the voting process.” (emphasis added)
In one post following Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) winning re-election last November, LUCHA appeared to affirm that both it and ACE assisted in organizational efforts to assure Kelly’s victory.
Wealthy dark money donors have a greater financial incentive to back C3s. 75 percent of their donations can go to politics and qualify as tax deductible — effectively maximizing their gift-giving while affording them a tax break. C4 donations aren’t tax deductible.
The IRS has long been aware of the disparity between the lawful intent for C3 and C4 entities, and the current reality of C3-C4 relationships. As ProPublica revealed in 2019, the IRS essentially gave up on holding nonprofits accountable.
The following are some of Arizona’s liberal C3-C4 nonprofit duos: One Arizona and Arizona Wins, Arizona Center for Empowerment and Living United for Change in Arizona, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund and Mi Familia Vota Victory, Chispa AZ/League of Conservation Voters Education Fund and League of Conservation Voters, Arizona Coalition for Change and Our Voice Our Vote, Instituto Lab and Instituto Power, Rural Arizona Engagement and Rural Arizona Action, and Voto Latino Foundation and Voto Latino.
The relationships between these nonprofits and the awareness of their straining tax law will be further explained in the next installment of this series.
This is Part Two in a series on the Left’s secret infrastructure to turn Arizona blue. Be sure to sign up for our newsletter to be notified of Part Three in the series.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
